This story was originally published on Supply Chain Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Supply Chain Dive newsletter. Dive Brief: FedEx is seeking a full refund from the U.S. on all paid duties that were installed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, per a lawsuit filed by the carrier in the Court of International Trade on Monday. A Supreme Court ruling Friday marked the end of tariffs enacted by President Donald Trump through IEEPA. In its lawsuit, F ...

Core Viewpoint - FedEx has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government seeking a full refund of tariffs imposed under President Trump's order, following a Supreme Court ruling that deemed such tariffs unlawful under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) [1][3][12]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit was filed in the Court of International Trade against the U.S. government and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), claiming that FedEx incurred costs to expedite shipments and is entitled to a refund of duties with interest [2]. - FedEx is seeking a full refund of all IEEPA duties paid to the United States, along with compensation for financial harm suffered [2][5]. - The lawsuit does not specify the total amount of tariffs paid by FedEx, but the company previously indicated an expected $1 billion impact on fiscal-year earnings due to U.S. trade policies, partially related to IEEPA duties [5][11]. Group 2: Supreme Court Ruling and Implications - The Supreme Court ruled that the IEEPA does not authorize the imposition of tariffs by the president, confirming that the Court of International Trade has exclusive jurisdiction over such tariffs [12]. - Following the ruling, CBP announced that the collection of IEEPA duties would cease, although no refund process has been established yet [14]. - FedEx has stated that it is taking necessary actions to protect its rights as an importer of record to seek duty refunds [5][8]. Group 3: Context of Tariffs - The tariffs in question were imposed by Trump in February 2025, targeting imports from China, Canada, and Mexico, citing national security concerns and unfair trade practices, and were later expanded to include reciprocal tariffs on 57 countries [11]. - U.S. businesses and consumers have paid over $175 billion in duties as a result of these tariffs [11].

President Donald Trump is not giving up on his tariff strategy. The president said Saturday in a post on Truth Social that he would now impose a 15% 'worldwide tariff.'"I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been 'ripping' the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level," he wrote. In a 6-3 decision on Friday, the Supreme Court s ...

Core Opinion - The Supreme Court ruled that a significant portion of the Trump administration's tariffs was imposed illegally under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which does not authorize the President to impose tariffs [2][4]. Legal Implications - The ruling was a 6-3 decision, with Chief Justice John Roberts authoring the majority opinion, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh expressed concerns about the potential complexity of refunding tariffs [2][3]. - Importers who paid IEEPA tariffs can pursue litigation for refunds, which may involve claims through the U.S. Court of International Trade or appeals to Customs and Border Protection [6][7]. Financial Impact - The nonpartisan Penn-Wharton Budget Model estimated that the reversal of the IEEPA tariffs could generate up to $175 billion in refunds [8]. - The Tax Foundation estimated that over $160 billion in tariffs were illegally collected under IEEPA, suggesting that full refunds could erase nearly three-fourths of the new revenues from Trump's tariffs [9]. Business Reactions - Trump expressed disappointment with the ruling and criticized the Court for not addressing the issue of tariff refunds [11][12]. - Experts noted that the refund process could be complicated and time-consuming, potentially taking weeks or even over a year [13]. Ongoing Litigation - More than 1,000 lawsuits have already been filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade to secure tariff refunds, indicating a significant legal response from affected businesses [15]. - Experts highlighted that the refund process must be efficient to minimize the burden on American businesses, particularly small firms [16][19]. Economic Considerations - The potential refunds could significantly impact the U.S. economy, with estimates of the amount at stake ranging from $150 billion to $200 billion [20]. - Economists noted that if refunds are passed on to consumers, the economic activity boost would be substantial, although if businesses retain the cash, the impact would be smaller [20].

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. government may owe over $175 billion in refunds to importers due to the Supreme Court ruling that President Trump's tariffs were imposed illegally without Congressional authorization [2][3]. Group 1: Legal Context - The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that the tariffs imposed by President Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) are illegal [2][3]. - The ruling did not explicitly address whether the federal government could retain the collected tariff money or if refunds would be mandated [3]. Group 2: Financial Implications - The estimated refund amount of $175 billion is based on the Penn-Wharton Budget Model, which was requested by Reuters [1][2]. - The U.S. Customs and Border Protection previously indicated that the amount of tariffs collected at risk of being refunded was $133.5 billion, which has likely increased due to ongoing collections [6][7]. Group 3: Logistical Challenges - Justice Brett Kavanaugh highlighted potential logistical difficulties in refunding the tariffs already collected, suggesting that the refund process could be complicated [4][5]. - There is concern that the refund process may create uncertainty regarding existing trade arrangements facilitated by the IEEPA tariffs, which have been linked to trade deals worth trillions of dollars [5][6].

The Supreme Court struck down a chunk of President Donald Trump's sweeping tariff policy on Friday, finding a new limit to the expansive presidential powers he has sought. The 6-3 decision centered on the tariffs Trump justified under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a national security law that allows the president to regulate economic activity during emergencies.Those IEEPA-justified tariffs have been one of Trump's most powerful weapons in his efforts to renegotiate trade agreements aroun ...

A person carrying a U.S. flag walks outside the U.S. Supreme Court, as its justices are set to hear oral arguments on U.S. President Donald Trump's bid to preserve sweeping tariffs after lower courts ruled that Trump overstepped his authority, in Washington, D.C., U.S., November 5, 2025.The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a huge chunk of President Donald Trump's far-reaching tariff agenda.The law that undergirds those import duties "does not authorize the President to impose tariffs," the majority ruled ...

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration's decision to manage $500 million of Venezuelan oil revenue in Qatar raises significant questions regarding Venezuela's governance and resource control following the U.S. capture of former President Nicolás Maduro [2] Group 1: U.S. Government Actions - The U.S. does not officially recognize the government led by interim President Delcy Rodriguez, instead recognizing the opposition-led National Assembly elected in 2015 as the legitimate representative of the Venezuelan people [3] - An executive order by President Trump mandates that proceeds from Venezuela's oil sales be held in a U.S. Treasury Department account, but it remains unclear which Venezuelan government this order pertains to [4] - The Trump administration is collaborating with Rodriguez, who has agreed to ship 50 million barrels of crude oil to the U.S., with the administration controlling the sale to maintain leverage over Caracas [6][11] Group 2: Legal and Political Implications - Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated that the decision to hold the money in Qatar is a temporary measure while the recognition issue is resolved, as Qatar recognizes the Maduro regime [7][8] - The U.S. has established a "respectful and productive" communication line with Rodriguez, viewing cooperation as a pragmatic approach during Venezuela's transition and stabilization phase [11][12] - Democrats in Congress are questioning the legality of the arrangement, particularly regarding the legal authority invoked under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) for the oil sales program [17][18] Group 3: Future Plans and Oversight - The U.S. plans to review a budget submitted by Caracas and will waive sanctions to disburse oil revenue from a blocked account, with an audit process to ensure appropriate spending [13][14] - Long-term goals include building a normal oil industry in Venezuela, allowing companies to sell crude directly into the global market without intermediaries [16]

Core Viewpoint - Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent believes it is "very unlikely" that the Supreme Court will overturn President Trump's use of emergency powers to impose tariffs, with a decision expected soon [1][2]. Group 1: Supreme Court and Tariffs - The Supreme Court is anticipated to rule on Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs, with a decision potentially coming as early as this week [4]. - Bessent stated that the Supreme Court is unlikely to overrule a president's significant economic policy, referencing their previous decision not to overturn the Affordable Care Act [2]. Group 2: Trump's Tariff Announcement - President Trump announced plans to impose new tariffs on goods from Europe until a deal is reached for the "Complete and Total purchase of Greenland" [3]. - The specific statute Trump is invoking for these tariffs was not detailed, but it appears to align with the duties imposed under the IEEPA [3].

Group 1 - The Supreme Court's delay in ruling on the legality of Trump's tariffs may indicate a favorable outcome for the Trump administration, according to JPMorgan analysts [1][2] - The longer the court takes to decide, the more it suggests a leaning towards the Trump administration, despite predictions from legal experts [2] - The underlying case involves potential tariff refunds amounting to $135 billion [3] Group 2 - President Trump warned of severe economic consequences if the Supreme Court rules against the federal government, potentially leading to repayments of "many hundreds of billions of dollars" in tariffs already collected, with costs possibly reaching into the trillions [4] - U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent expressed confidence in the administration's ability to enforce tariff policies, citing sections of the 1962 Trade Act that grant significant authority over import duties [5] Group 3 - Costco Wholesale Corp has initiated legal action against the Trump administration for a complete refund of all duties collected under the IEEPA, raising concerns about the eligibility of other businesses for refunds if the tariffs are deemed unlawful [6] - Other companies, including Revlon Consumer Products Corp. and Kawasaki Motors Manufacturing Corp., have also filed lawsuits in a U.S. trade court regarding similar issues since late October [7]